I agree voted both polls above. That said, I have a concern and some ideas which might mitigate it:
[Agree vote if you like one of the BYPASS IDEAS below, even temporarily ✅
Disagree vote if you think there shouldn’t be a filter bypass, even temporarily ❌ ]
CONCERN:
After so much discussion I worry that going from all community posts to zero community posts will leave people assuming that recent concerns are not being handled. EA orgs are still charities and I’d still like to hear the actions they take to address things they seem important.
Example: My understanding is that not knowing that actions were being taken for women in the community this is one reason why women felt the need to speak with TIME, because they (validly!) didn’t know what actions were being taken in response to all the community discourse.
I have just, the last couple days, been feeling really hopeful that leaders might post more actions they take! A lot of things have been posted recently and I think it’s important people see them.
BYPASS IDEAS:
Add a tag for “major community actions” or “actions taken to address community concerns”* or something like that, which is designed to help things end up on front-page still. This subset of posts would differ from say “raising community concerns” or “written responses to community concerns”. If the bypass tag is over-abused I could see you cancelling the feature, but maybe it won’t be.
If you don’t want to give users the ability to self-tag for front-page community stuff, maybe you can make it overt somehow that users can message mods and ask to bypass, if they think their community post may warrant being on front-page still?
Idk if a bypass is necessary forever, but I think it might be useful for the next couple months so as to ease people off the discussions by addressing concerns and making sure people see those concrete actions.
*this was written hastily so I’m sure there is something better here
I think self-tagging would be seriously overused even if the desired categories could be clearly defined. I also think putting the mods in the position of granting/denying special treatment could create controversy. The class of “proposals requiring feedback” in particular is potentially broad, and I dont think we want the mods having to select which proposals to frontpage. I’m potentially more open to this for surveys if they are infrequent.
My guess is that “describes actions an organization is taking” (as opposed to “actions someone thinks an organization should take”) is a relatively objective categorization, and I feel reasonably optimistic about our ability to accurately apply these tags.
That being said, there are a bunch of ways to slice this ontology, and I’m worried we might get a proliferation of exceptions to the rule which will end up making me think that we should stick with the simple “community: yes/no”.
Wouldn’t option 2 above mostly resolve these concerns? Community stuff would still be fully visible on the frontpage, just boxed into its own section rather than intermixed.
I do prefer that layout in that sense (not all senses). I’m not sure that’s the format the community or staff will end up trying though. They might conclude that section isn’t separate enough to solve all the problems with people wasting energy, getting discouraged, and being nerdsniped.
I disagree with the concern: In the proposed solution, we are not going to zero community posts, they are just at a different tab or place at the frontpage but clearly accessible. I would actually be in favour of this change even without any of the concerns regarding ‘negativity’ from community post, it’s a minor change to make the forum better readable!
I think another way of putting this is that I am:
-in favor of filtering community posts
-wary of burying posts which are officially about “Meta EA: the cause area” or “EA Infrastructure”. Like any posts by say, EV’s team about new interventions they are trying, I’d probably still want to see.
Maybe the latter wasn’t to be included in “community” anyway though
I agree voted both polls above. That said, I have a concern and some ideas which might mitigate it:
[Agree vote if you like one of the BYPASS IDEAS below, even temporarily ✅
Disagree vote if you think there shouldn’t be a filter bypass, even temporarily ❌ ]
CONCERN: After so much discussion I worry that going from all community posts to zero community posts will leave people assuming that recent concerns are not being handled. EA orgs are still charities and I’d still like to hear the actions they take to address things they seem important.
Example: My understanding is that not knowing that actions were being taken for women in the community this is one reason why women felt the need to speak with TIME, because they (validly!) didn’t know what actions were being taken in response to all the community discourse.
I have just, the last couple days, been feeling really hopeful that leaders might post more actions they take! A lot of things have been posted recently and I think it’s important people see them.
BYPASS IDEAS:
Add a tag for “major community actions” or “actions taken to address community concerns”* or something like that, which is designed to help things end up on front-page still. This subset of posts would differ from say “raising community concerns” or “written responses to community concerns”. If the bypass tag is over-abused I could see you cancelling the feature, but maybe it won’t be.
If you don’t want to give users the ability to self-tag for front-page community stuff, maybe you can make it overt somehow that users can message mods and ask to bypass, if they think their community post may warrant being on front-page still?
Idk if a bypass is necessary forever, but I think it might be useful for the next couple months so as to ease people off the discussions by addressing concerns and making sure people see those concrete actions.
*this was written hastily so I’m sure there is something better here
I think self-tagging would be seriously overused even if the desired categories could be clearly defined. I also think putting the mods in the position of granting/denying special treatment could create controversy. The class of “proposals requiring feedback” in particular is potentially broad, and I dont think we want the mods having to select which proposals to frontpage. I’m potentially more open to this for surveys if they are infrequent.
My guess is that “describes actions an organization is taking” (as opposed to “actions someone thinks an organization should take”) is a relatively objective categorization, and I feel reasonably optimistic about our ability to accurately apply these tags.
That being said, there are a bunch of ways to slice this ontology, and I’m worried we might get a proliferation of exceptions to the rule which will end up making me think that we should stick with the simple “community: yes/no”.
Makes sense!
Wouldn’t option 2 above mostly resolve these concerns? Community stuff would still be fully visible on the frontpage, just boxed into its own section rather than intermixed.
I do prefer that layout in that sense (not all senses). I’m not sure that’s the format the community or staff will end up trying though. They might conclude that section isn’t separate enough to solve all the problems with people wasting energy, getting discouraged, and being nerdsniped.
I disagree with the concern: In the proposed solution, we are not going to zero community posts, they are just at a different tab or place at the frontpage but clearly accessible. I would actually be in favour of this change even without any of the concerns regarding ‘negativity’ from community post, it’s a minor change to make the forum better readable!
I think another way of putting this is that I am: -in favor of filtering community posts -wary of burying posts which are officially about “Meta EA: the cause area” or “EA Infrastructure”. Like any posts by say, EV’s team about new interventions they are trying, I’d probably still want to see.
Maybe the latter wasn’t to be included in “community” anyway though